Tilting at windmills? the Indian debate over the responsibility to protect after UNSC resolution 1973

Ian Hall*

*Corresponding author for this work

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

    44 Citations (Scopus)

    Abstract

    India voted for United Nations Security Council Resolution 1970, but abstained from Resolution 1973 authorizing a no-fly zone over Libya, subsequently criticizing the NATO campaign. This stance provoked much comment within India and among foreign commentators on Indian foreign policy. Some praised it as morally superior to approving military action, which was portrayed by some as Western 'neo-colonialism'. Others, however, were critical of India's unwillingness to back intervention in Libya and the principle of the Responsibility to Protect. For the critics, India's objections to UNSC 1973 merely demonstrated the continued weakness of the foreign policy establishment and its inability to balance power politics and ethical values. This article evaluates these various positions, but argues that while the Libyan episode stimulated an unprecedented amount of comment in India about R2P, it is unlikely that the Indian government or leading Indian commentators will soon shift their positions.

    Original languageEnglish
    Pages (from-to)84-108
    Number of pages25
    JournalGlobal Responsibility to Protect
    Volume5
    Issue number1
    DOIs
    Publication statusPublished - 2013

    Fingerprint

    Dive into the research topics of 'Tilting at windmills? the Indian debate over the responsibility to protect after UNSC resolution 1973'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

    Cite this